skip to main content
10.1145/1362550.1362580acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Fingers, veins and the grey pound: accessibility of biometric technology

Published:28 August 2007Publication History

ABSTRACT

Motivation -- Fingerprint verification systems are the most widely used biometric technology, however several studies suggest that their performance deteriorates when older individuals use the technology. This research investigated both the accessibility and acceptability of biometric technology for an older population.

Research approach -- A fingerprint and a vein system were tested with a group of 36 participants, with a mean age of 65.7 years. Participants used both devices and both objective performance data and subjective measures of opinion were collected.

Findings -- The vein system performed significantly better than the fingerprint system, and was preferred by the majority of participants.

Research implications -- The relationship between user preference and device performance is complex however, and could not be fully explained through this evaluation.

Take away message -- The elderly are poorly represented in studies investigating biometric technology, though this research suggests that vein systems are a technology that could accommodate this demographic.

References

  1. Ashbourn, J. (2000). Biometrics: Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. BioSec Consortium. (2004). Report on results of first phase usability testing and guidelines for developers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Burton-Jones, A., & Hubona, G. S. (2005). Individual Differences and Usage Behaviour: Revisiting a Technology Acceptance Model Assumption. The DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 36(2), 58--77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Celent. (2006). Biometric Technologies: Are We There Yet? Boston.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Chandra, A., & Calderon, T. (2005). Challenges and Constraints to the Diffusion of Biometrics in Information Systems. Communications of the ACM, 48(12), 101--106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Coventry, L., Angeli, A. D., & Johnson, G. (2003). Honest It's Me! Self Service Verification. Proceedings of CHI 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis, F. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and End User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 318--339.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. European Commission. (2005). Biometrics at the Frontiers: Assessing the Impact on Society: European Commission Joint Research Centre. Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. IBG. (2006). Comparative Biometric Testing: Round 6 Public Report: International Biometrics Group.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. IBG (2007) Biometrics Market and Industry Report 2007--2012. http://www.biometricgroup.com/reports/public/market_report.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Langenderfer, J., & Linnhoff, S. (2005). The Emergence of Biometrics and Its Effect on Consumers. Journal of Consumer Affairs, Volume 39(2), 314.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Mansfield, T., Kelly, G., Chandler, D., & Kane, J. (2001). Biometric Product Testing Final Report: National Physics Laboratory.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. McGinity, M. (2005). Let Your Fingers Do the Talking. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 21--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Modi, S. K., & Elliott, S. J. (2006). Impact of Image Quality on Performance: Comparison of Young and Elderly Fingerprints. International Conference on Recent Advances in Soft Computing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Toledano, D. T., Pozo, R. F., Trapote, A. H., & Gomez, L. H. (2006). Usability evaluation of multi-modal biometric verification systems. Interacting with Computers, (18) 1101--1122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. UKPS. (2005). UK Passport Service Biometrics Enrolment Trial.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    ECCE '07: Proceedings of the 14th European conference on Cognitive ergonomics: invent! explore!
    August 2007
    334 pages
    ISBN:9781847998491
    DOI:10.1145/1362550

    Copyright © 2007 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 August 2007

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate56of91submissions,62%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader